37: Why We Are Increasingly Divided Into Ideological Bubbles

had when I was in London earlier this month. It was shortly after the Brexit referendum, which shocked a lot of people. The decision by the UK populace to leave the EU came as a shock to a lot of people, including myself, if I'm a honest. So what happened is I was in London. I was talking to someone that you actually know, but who shall remain unnamed, someone I

respect a lot. And this person said they had actually voted to leave the EU and it was the last person I ever would have thought would vote to leave.

But then as we started talking, h this person listed all the reasons they thought leaving was a good decision, including a long drawn out argument about the death of neoliberalism, UM, and I realized, you know, my instinctive reaction to hearing someone saying that they want to vote to leave is uh, you know, incredulity, I guess, And maybe maybe it shouldn't be.

Everyone has valid reasons, right absolutely, And before we go on you further, I'm just hoping that as soon as the recording stops on this podcast, you tell me who this person is. But I think this is an incredibly important topic because I think that when it comes to the briggs At referendum, when it comes to politics in the US, it's pretty clear that um and elsewhere the world, it's pretty clear that people separate themselves into these ideological bubbles.

And not only do they not know or can imagine how someone sees something opposite, they don't even experience the They seem to make almost no attempt to understand the other side's point of view. And I think this is pretty long term ramifications for the media, for democracy, for the economy, and probably also for markets. Given how many people in the Briggsit referendum, we're completely stunned by the

results exactly. That's the perfect segue alright, So here with us today to talk about why the other side of the argument is not necessarily dumb. Is Sean Blanda. He is editor in chief of You, which is a publication that's dedicated to providing the missing curriculum for creative careers. But he is also the author of a really good Medium post on this topic that kind of enunciates a lot of the ideas that we are discussing right now. Sean, Welcome to the program. Very slight to be here. Thank

you for having me. Well. Sean, you wrote a a post on medium about the other side not always being wrong, and of course that other side can mean a lot of different things. But for many people working in finance and the major cities or technology, the other side either means the Brexit referendum, or it means voting for Trump or something else. So what did you mean in this

post and why did you write it. I'm a very active Twitter user, and a news event would happen, I would see coalescing of viewpoints, and then you know, the opposition viewpoints starts to filter into that bubble, and then I would see it immediately mocked like it was an antibody, and I thought things cannot be this simple, and this is right. This is right before Brexit, where when this happened, and the notion that the other side had something to

say was not even crossing people's mind. So one thing I did is I followed people that I disagreed with on Twitter, and I found that things would come up and it would change my mind. As an example, the recent debate around gun control. Um, you know, as has been well documented, there were four gun control bills put on the floor of the House. People were arguing about it, and initially I was on one side of that, which is, yes, let's let's heavily regulate guns through this no fly list.

And then someone posited, how's that no fly list mandated? Who? What judicial oversight? And I was like, oh, I would not have thought of that if I was not following together side. I this this thing is more complex than I thought. The other side is not just a bunch of buffoons that don't agree with me. They have nuanced political views as well, and I've seen that born out again and again, and Exit is the latest example of that. So when we talk about opinions sort of coalescing on

either side, why do you think that happens? Is it just human nature, like it's in our nature to cluster around people who are similar to us and you know, maybe socioeconomic status and also their opinions. Yes, and I think in the past it was harder to do that because we didn't pick and choose are the media we consumed and less of the people we hung out with. I mean, especially for kind of the young media savvy

person who's very transient. You can pick your friends and pick the news you you view, and you can summarily reject whole outlets and just kind of stick to things that appeal to you. And at first that doesn't have such a bad impact, but as years and years go on, you are totally divorced from some people's realities. And you saw this in Brexit, where people felt, you know, left behind by some of the economic prosperity that some other

people have enjoyed. And if you were amongst and surrounded by only people who have enjoyed that, you could not even fathom why someone would want to change the situation as it is, Um, what do you think this? So I've certainly noticed the same phenomenon. I mean, you know, I'm on Facebook like everyone else, and I watched the instant reactions to things. And I watched the sort of widespread dismay among my social circles that the idea that um the UK would vote to leave the EU. What

is it? Worries me because I think like long term about democracy and I for what it's worth. I don't think it's just, you know, I don't think it's just the elites are the sort of sort of like Chelismpaul and elites, because you witness like the same sort of like um uh, sort of snyde caricatures of the other side by the other side. The fact that we use the word elites and right can laugh it off is one example of that exactly. But what do you think this? Ultimately?

I worry about, like what does it do for democracy if people can wall themselves into these worlds in which no competing ideas can enter the debate. I think you lose, You lose empathy for the people around you in a way that you can't even fathom. And I think the way there's I think we all have issues that are controversial in which when you see it affect you or someone around you, it can change your mind. And that can be something like your dad doesn't have healthcare, and

what does that mean? What does the struggle you go through. Or one of your friends is unfairly arrested and jailed, what does that mean to and you explore the judicial process for the first time and you go, oh my god, this group of people had a point or I see it through their lens now, and now I think the only way that happens to us is when it directly happens to us, and we're stopping to take people's word for for it sometimes and assuming that their intention is

malice or at worst stupidity. That that then you only enforce policy positions, follow news that reinforces your worldview because you just can't even imagine what it's like not to have your worldview. And what's worse is you don't even know there is another worldview. You feel like you're in the supermajority and there's these fringe nut wackos that are in the minority, and who are they? They're ridiculous. I'm

the smart one. So we've sort of touched on this, but how much does social media actually play into this dynamic? Because you know, we all use Twitter, we all use Facebook, we all have our sort of personally curated selection of news nowadays, and a lot of it comes to us through our friends and our contacts. Does that end up hardening the lines between different opinions different groups? I would say, if you let it. Because one thing is, you know,

we live in New York City. I don't know anyone who I'm not related to that lives in a rural area. So social media is great because I can seek out people who live in areas not like New York City and see the things that they care about, the things they're struggling with. So it's good. But I can very easily say this person is a nut job. I'm going to block them, like we literally have the word block

and mute. I think one thing, you know, it's worth pointing out that I think these this phenomenon is not as simple as there's the cosmopolitan elites and everyone who else. I I used to live in Vermont and so almost all of my high school friends are lots of them were huge Bernie Sanders supporters. And what I noticed during the campaign. I mean, obviously they were vociferously pro Sanders

and many of them very anti Hillary. But what I noticed, not just dad, was they had like basically convinced themselves that he was winning for much of the race. There's a lot of Bernie math skets and things like that, Bernie math and so it wasn't just that they only they saw, you know, they the ideological arguments, but that actual reality of what was happening with votes that were counted were numbers. They had a completely different perspective on

than what was getting through the mainstream media. And I think a lot of reporters cover politics, We'll say they like, you know, got a lot of anger from the Berneu Sanders supporters because they thought they were just lying or making it up the various numbers. Yeah right, you you build your own reality. And then this is a this is a side effect of the skepticism where you're you think the media is against people like me. Everyone's against people like me, because everyone I know like me feels

this way, So there must be something here. You saw something similar in their run up to the twelve election, where there was a lot of people that were convinced m Ronnie is gonna win in a landslide becauseveryone they knew was yeah, yeah, right, And and they pick and choose the news they had and that's obviously not what happened, So I agree. I I think I used the the Cosmopolitan not Cosmopolitan, because I'm simply acknowledging how I came to it, which is through my filter bubble. I lived

in New York before years. Previously, I lived in Philadelphia for seven years, so for my entire adult life, I've been part of a large city. But I agree with you entirely well. We saw an example of this alternate reality dynamic earlier this month when Andrea led some of the former Conservative Party leader candidate basically said that Sterling had performed absolutely fine in the aftermath of Brexit, and anyone um with access to a Bloomberg terminal or basic

finance data could see that that really wasn't true. Do people, I mean, what what do we actually do when this happens? Is there any way to fact check these things? Do people care about fact checking anymore? I mean, I think the answers no. But I think that was the most common response to the piece was what happens when they're

actually wrong? Like what happens when I'm trying to give into a draining outside and it's really not I can I can empirically say that, and to that, I would say, you know, I think it's helpful to figure out why a person is motivated to get to that conclusion and then attack that motivation rather than the misfect. Why does that particular person what what what reason do they have? What? What reason do Bernie Sanders fans have to believe that

he's winning? I mean, the obviously the answer is pretty obvious, but I think it has a sound gripe in how he might be treated by the main the larger media outlets at large, right, And that's just the manifestation of that, And I think too often we attack the manifestation without looking at the core reason. You Know, something I've wondered about is is this just going to get worse and worse because it doesn't seem like there's an obvious mechanism

out there to solve it. And you think about the speed at which technology is advancing, like virtual reality, it seems like or um or payment systems or communication systems that can connect the ideologically like minded across the world even faster. It seems like there's just more and more opportunities proliferating for people to create their own worlds and inhabit spaces, whether physical or technological, in which you can more more finely tune uh what gets in and the

other people in them. I think I think we're going to develop This is me being extremely optimistic, and people listening to this might roll their eyes, but I think we're going to develop the muscles as a media consuming public to start to recognize that this is happening and when this is happening, And I think I think something like Brexit is a good wake up call to that where I know I had no my media consumption that I like, I thought it was a guarantee that the

answer was remained right. I thought it was guaranteed. So when that happens, I'm like, oh, what what am I consuming about this? And what media am I consuming and actively searching out other Now I know that's kind of altruistic and that puts a lot of responsibility on the individual, a busy individual that may have other things going on.

But I I think we're going to develop a muscle the similar way we do with I don't know, bad content on television, Like we know that if our kids are up at ten pm, they might see bad content and we should we should police that change the channel. I think we're going to find that that that process as a society, I hope. So is this the awkward teenage phase in our new media consumption? We just have to sort of grow into it. Yeah, I mean, and you can see it in things we thought were established.

I mean I just walked here and I saw, you know, twenty people walk around with their Pokemon go on their phone, right, And and your inclination is to be like, that's ridiculous, that's crazy, that's a fat But that kind of shows like how nascent the medium is of cameras on phones, right, Like we just we just figured out this super great game that allows people to talk to each other. You know, you mentioned walking outside and seeing that, And I've had

this thought before. You know, if you're like, if you're on the if you're online all day, you see people

are just like raging at each other and fighting the characture. Yeah, and then like you sort of step outside and you see people going about their business, You're like, oh, maybe this is not really Everybody is like yeah, people are polite, And I often feel like there's this dichotomy, like people get upset at things online that I've never once seen someone get upset for in real life and people are offline and I see, like people like a level of

civility and empathy offline and just when I'm going out my day to day business and I'm like, actually, maybe people aren't that bad, and I'd like, I'd like, God, I'd like to think that online we're just going to start to realize, you know. I think I think there's a group of people that whenever you see something that disagrees with you online, you have to be like, I have to answer that, I have to set them right.

And maybe the mechanism if someone was going down the street young something you didn't agree with you, like, they're probably having a rough day, Like I just gotta let that go, Like I'll talk to them when cooler heads prevail. I think they're the manners and social graces will are are only now starting to come together. And I think it does occasionally take an event to make an individual

old person realize where their blind spots are. But the downside while we figure this out is that we do have um potentially dangerous populism sort of bubbling to the surface, and it seems like people are getting more and more angry with each other. And that's actually you know, it's happening online, but it's translating into real life and our

actual political situation. So there's some urgency here. And I think I think the I mean the events of the past week, you've seen unity on a on a larger scale, you know, calls for togetherness. Now, how that togetherness happens obviously is a whole other can of worms, But I think I think it goes back to finding the root calls for why people are divisive? What what is? What is the thing? What is the reason? You know? I live?

Has been made about people economically hurting and then taking it out in certain ways or Yeah, I just I just feel if we recognize the people across from us as human beings with nuance opinions that have read things you haven't read, it to watch movies that you haven't watched, that have had tragedies happened to them that haven't happened to you, and taking a second go, maybe there's some summation of their life experiences, life experiences that have led

them there and being empathetic to that. And that's hard to do a hund forty characters, I will grant you, but just knowing that that's possible, that that's even a possibility is something I don't feel like a lot of people are doing. They just summarily reject the thing that happens. What I've had. I had a couple of people share the piece you wrote, and I think it resonated with a lot of people. Um, what kind of reactions have

you had? Did people? Were there people who? Because I mean I could see it going kind of two ways where they're like, yeah, this is a real issue. Or another reaction is I'm all for empathy, but why should I try to see the perspective of racist, xenophobic knuckle draggers. Yeah, And so I'm curious, like, what kind of reaction do you got? So there's a line right where? And I think racism is that line when someone just being outright

racist me reasoning with you might not go anywhere. And I think that line is further back than people think. I think people advocate for certain you know, policy positions or the certain ways the country should work, and they're rejected as being out of touch or dumb or naive. And I think that all I'm asking is like take the step path that And I think I think I

think that patience is what's needed. And it's easy to say that when someone's not being racist towards you, and I grant that a million times out of a million, but I just I just think dismissing someone as stupid or bigoted or not having all the facts, like, just

take take a second, I guess all I would. So what was the reaction like, So the reaction there was two bits of reaction, which were three bits of reaction, which you're interesting overwhelmingly, which is very thankful when you write stuff and this doesn't normally happen, but people like this was great, this was helpful, thank you, And some people were said, I noticed I do this in my own life when this was happening gamer Gate was going on in full then, so a lot of people reached

out to me about that. We're like, oh, I understand the other uh part. Now. Secondly, was what I said before, what happens when they're just wrong, factually wrong, And what I would say is get to the point of why they believe what they believe. And then third, I think the most troubling aspect of this is people who were closed minded used that article as a weapon to say why people that weren't them were closed minded, right, which

is like an infinite loop. Yeah, which and I purposely try to as best I can use the language of the other side, because the other side is different things to different people. But then people use that to justify the fact that, like, more people should listen to me. You see, I'm I'm part of the other side. You should take me seriously. But everyone thinks the other side, and everyone thinks that they're the marginalized one exactly, and and some people are right, but it's it's I've had

people say thank you for this article. I use this to uh, you know, all those those damn feminazis online. I finally I should I said this to all of them to shut them up. And I'm like, did you listen to what they were saying, you know, to take up take a minute? Why did they feel that way? Just just just don't don't use this as another weapon. Alright, a plead for some civility on the internet. Why don't we leave it there, Sean, thank you so much for

joining us, Thanks for having me. Thank you, Joe. I know that wasn't as market see as a lot of our other episodes, but what do you think about that. I think this is just such an important topic because, as I was saying before, it's really hard to be that optimistic about democracy if these trends towards walling yourself off to only like minded argument and only facts that

could support your side. If we continue with that trend, it seems like a certain um level of valuing debate and a certain some degree of a shared set of effects seems to be sort of a crucial ingredient. Yeah, and I think this idea of the Balkanization of opinions is incredibly relevant now obviously in politics for democracy, as you pointed out, but again also when it comes to investing.

And I know that there have been reams written about confirmation bias and investing cognitive biases, that sort of thing. But really it seems more important than ever to kind of stop and think about what the other side is saying. And if you manage to do that right, if you managed to gauge increasingly divided public opinions correctly, you could make a lot of money, and um, maybe you could come to understand your fellow man a little bit more

as well. Yeah. The bregsit um, the breggsit vote obviously a huge opportunity for people to make money had they had a different perspective than the mainstream, you know, even within investing in economics. It's kind of fascinating how people form certain camps like the gold camp or the anti fed camp, or the tech camp or whatever. And so I think that there is probably almost always an opportunity for profit if you force yourself out of um how you think. And I know, like I've changed my mind

many issues relating to both politics and economics. Big mind changes, uh, over the years, and I think I'm better for it. All Right, we'll do Joe Wisenthal Mind Changes episode sometime later this year. But maybe, all right, I just write a post twenty big things have changed my mind on that. Well I would read that. Yeah, well it was. It was great talking with you, Tracy. This has been another

episode of the Odd Loves Podcast. I'm Joe Wisenthal. You can find me on Twitter at the Stalwarts, and I'm Tracy Alloway. I'm on Twitter at Tracy Alloway. You can find Sean on Twitter at Sean Blend. Thanks for listening. Yeah,